To send content items to your account,
please confirm that you agree to abide by our usage policies.
If this is the first time you use this feature, you will be asked to authorise Cambridge Core to connect with your account.
Find out more about sending content to .

To send content items to your Kindle, first ensure no-reply@cambridge.org
is added to your Approved Personal Document E-mail List under your Personal Document Settings
on the Manage Your Content and Devices page of your Amazon account. Then enter the ‘name’ part
of your Kindle email address below.
Find out more about sending to your Kindle.

Note you can select to send to either the @free.kindle.com or @kindle.com variations.
‘@free.kindle.com’ emails are free but can only be sent to your device when it is connected to wi-fi.
‘@kindle.com’ emails can be delivered even when you are not connected to wi-fi, but note that service fees apply.

By using this service, you agree that you will only keep articles for personal use, and will not openly distribute them via Dropbox, Google Drive or other file sharing services
Please confirm that you accept the terms of use.

Clement Greenberg (1909–94) and Harold Rosenberg (1906–78) were the two art critics most closely associated with abstract expressionism in the 1940s and 1950s. Neither began their careers as art critics, however. By the mid-1980s, Rosenberg had published literary essays and poems in left-wing magazines, and Greenberg's articles and reviews first appeared at the end of that decade. During the 1940s, Greenberg began to write art criticism, and Rosenberg's essays began to appear frequently in the 1950s. By that time, both had become part of the group known informally as the New York Intellectuals, many of whom were Jewish and children of immigrant parents.

Highly verbal, vocal, argumentative, and politically left of center, they often published in magazines such as Partisan Review, Commentary, and Dissent. Although both Greenberg and Rosenberg ultimately rejected the more dogmatic and authoritarian aspects of leftist politics, they nevertheless supported the idea that society must move forward, but not necessarily by political means. Greenberg thought that such momentum could be maintained by the cultural elite, and Rosenberg, influenced by surrealism's concerns for the creative process, believed that individuals who were independent minded and creative could do the same. Both encouraged artists to turn from the social concerns that engaged many during the 1930s to apolitical, self-searching themes that came to characterize the art of the 1940s. In effect, they, especially Rosenberg, lionized the artist as an heroic individual. In the words of one historian, both “worked to find a safe haven for radical progress within the realm of individualistic culture.” And both, among the most perspicacious critics of their time, discovered, encouraged, and/or supported artists who ultimately became major figures, such as Jackson Pollock and Willem de Kooning.

Many have pondered if there is any such thing as Jewish art, while others have wondered if there is any such thing as Jewish American art. In fact, critics and historians in America have tried to describe the nature of Jewish art for decades. While Jewish artists have acknowledged that aspects of their cultural and religious experiences and backgrounds as Jews inspired them and their art, most have refused to admit that there is something called Jewish art. Even though many American artists were and are Jewish, virtually all of them have denied the label of Jewish artist. Thus, by the artists’ very standards, neither Jewish art nor Jewish American art can be said to truly exist. Nevertheless, discernibly Jewish works have been called an art done by any Jew, an art with Jewish subject matter, as well as an art that applies only to liturgical objects. In addition, it has been considered to be overly intellectual, overly emotional, and given predominantly to abstract or figurative formulations. Some had contended that true Jewish art would ultimately make its appearance either once Jewish artists were properly supported or in a Jewish national state, in reference to Israel. However, the former never truly occurred and the latter would lead to an Israeli, but not a specifically Jewish, art. Nevertheless, one commonality of so-called Jewish art currently exists: Virtually all assessments of it encompass only ancient and modern works, sidestepping the multitude of intervening works that held any Jewish content and affected both its audience and creator in the process.

In all of the literature on abstract expressionism, very little has been written about what I would call the Emersonian presence. It is a presence rather than a source or influence. And it is not limited to Emerson, since it can be found in such figures as Walt Whitman and William James, among others. But it is easier to say “an Emersonian presence” because precise influences are difficult, probably impossible, to establish. What I am concerned with is an attitude of mind that recurs in American intellectual history and that resonates through much 20th-century American art, ranging from early modernists such as John Marin through artists associated with process art. I do not mean to deny other welldocumented European and American sources, influences, and presences in abstract expressionism and other American movements, but only to call attention at this time to the Emersonian presence.

Recommend this

Email your librarian or administrator to recommend adding this to your organisation's collection.